Systems engineering solution analysis

ABSTRACT

A method and system for performing a technical solution analysis is provided. The method includes receiving requirements associated with an IT system for design, assumptions, dependency data, stakeholder data, and entry criteria readiness data. A quality level of the requirements is evaluated and a requirements quality sub-score for each requirement is calculated. The assumptions are evaluated for hidden requirements and an assumptions score is generated. The dependency data is evaluated and a dependencies score is generated. The stakeholder data is evaluated and a stakeholder approval level score is generated. The entry criteria readiness data is evaluated and an entry criteria readiness score is generated. An overall score summary summarizing the requirements quality score, the assumptions score, the dependencies score, the stakeholder score, and the criteria readiness score is generated.

FIELD

The present invention relates generally to a method for analyzing anengineering technical solution, and in particular to a method andassociated system for analyzing a technical solution across multipledimensions.

BACKGROUND

Determining solutions to issues typically includes an inaccurate processwith little flexibility. Evaluating multiple solutions may include acomplicated process that may be time consuming and require a largeamount of resources. Accordingly, there exists a need in the art toovercome at least some of the deficiencies and limitations describedherein above.

SUMMARY

A first aspect of the invention provides a method comprising: receiving,by a computer processor of a computing system, requirements (NRQ)associated with an IT system for design, assumptions associated with thecomplex system requirements, dependency data associated with therequirements (NRQ), stakeholder data associated with the requirements(NRQ), and entry criteria readiness data associated with therequirements (NRQ); evaluating, by the computer processor executing arequirements analytical engine, a quality level of the requirements(NRQ); calculating, by the computer processor based on the qualitylevel, a requirements quality sub-score (RSC) for each requirement ofthe requirements (NRQ); evaluating, by the computer processor executingan assumptions analytical engine, the assumptions for hiddenrequirements of the requirements (NRQ); generating, by the computerprocessor based on the hidden requirements, an assumptions score for theassumptions; evaluating, by the computer processor executing adependencies analytical engine, the dependency data; generating, by thecomputer processor based on results of the evaluating the dependencydata, a dependencies score for the dependencies data; evaluating, by thecomputer processor executing a stakeholder analytical engine, thestakeholder data; generating, by the computer processor based on resultsof the evaluating the stakeholder data, a stakeholder approval levelscore for the stakeholder data; evaluating, by the computer processorexecuting a criteria analytical engine, the entry criteria readinessdata; generating, by the computer processor based on results of theevaluating the entry criteria readiness data, an entry criteriareadiness score (ECRS) for entry criteria readiness data; andgenerating, by the computer processor, an overall score summarysummarizing each the requirements quality score, the assumptions score,the dependencies score, the stakeholder score, and the criteriareadiness score.

A second aspect of the invention provides a computing system comprisinga computer processor coupled to a computer-readable memory unit, thememory unit comprising instructions that when executed by the computerprocessor implements a method comprising: receiving, by the computerprocessor, requirements (NRQ) associated with an IT system for design,assumptions associated with the complex system requirements, dependencydata associated with the requirements (NRQ), stakeholder data associatedwith the requirements (NRQ), and entry criteria readiness dataassociated with the requirements (NRQ); evaluating, by the computerprocessor executing a requirements analytical engine, a quality level ofthe requirements (NRQ); calculating, by the computer processor based onthe quality level, a requirements quality sub-score (RSC) for eachrequirement of the requirements (NRQ); evaluating, by the computerprocessor executing an assumptions analytical engine, the assumptionsfor hidden requirements of the requirements (NRQ); generating, by thecomputer processor based on the hidden requirements, an assumptionsscore for the assumptions; evaluating, by the computer processorexecuting a dependencies analytical engine, the dependency data;generating, by the computer processor based on results of the evaluatingthe dependency data, a dependencies score for the dependencies data;evaluating, by the computer processor executing a stakeholder analyticalengine, the stakeholder data; generating, by the computer processorbased on results of the evaluating the stakeholder data, a stakeholderapproval level score for the stakeholder data; evaluating, by thecomputer processor executing a criteria analytical engine, the entrycriteria readiness data; generating, by the computer processor based onresults of the evaluating the entry criteria readiness data, an entrycriteria readiness score (ECRS) for entry criteria readiness data; andgenerating, by the computer processor, an overall score summarysummarizing each the requirements quality score, the assumptions score,the dependencies score, the stakeholder score, and the criteriareadiness score.

A third aspect of the invention provides a computer program product fortechnical solution analysis, the computer program product comprising:one or more computer-readable, tangible storage devices; programinstructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices,to initiate receiving requirements (NRQ) associated with an IT systemfor design, assumptions associated with the complex system requirements,dependency data associated with the requirements (NRQ), stakeholder dataassociated with the requirements (NRQ), and entry criteria readinessdata associated with the requirements (NRQ); program instructions,stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices, to evaluate aquality level of the requirements (NRQ); program instructions, stored onat least one of the one or more storage devices, to calculate based onthe quality level, a requirements quality sub-score (RSC) for eachrequirement of the requirements (NRQ); program instructions, stored onat least one of the one or more storage devices, to evaluate theassumptions for hidden requirements of the requirements (NRQ); programinstructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices,to generate based on the hidden requirements, an assumptions score forthe assumptions; program instructions, stored on at least one of the oneor more storage devices, to evaluate the dependency data; programinstructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices,to generate based on results of the evaluating the dependency data, adependencies score for the dependencies data; program instructions,stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices, to evaluatethe stakeholder data; program instructions, stored on at least one ofthe one or more storage devices, to generate based on results of theevaluating the stakeholder data, a stakeholder approval level score forthe stakeholder data; program instructions, stored on at least one ofthe one or more storage devices, to evaluate the entry criteriareadiness data; program instructions, stored on at least one of the oneor more storage devices, to generate based on results of the evaluatingthe entry criteria readiness data, an entry criteria readiness score(ECRS) for entry criteria readiness data; and program instructions,stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices, to generatean overall score summary summarizing each the requirements qualityscore, the assumptions score, the dependencies score, the stakeholderscore, and the criteria readiness score.

The present invention advantageously provides a simple method andassociated system capable of determining solutions to issues.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates a system for providing a means for allowing a systemsengineer to analyze technical solutions across multiple dimensions, inaccordance with embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 2 illustrates an algorithm detailing a process flow enabled bysystem 2 of FIG. 1 for providing a means for allowing a systems engineerto analyze technical solutions across multiple dimensions, in accordancewith embodiments of the present invention.

FIGS. 3-13 illustrate algorithms detailing various steps of thealgorithm of FIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of the presentinvention.

FIG. 14 illustrates a graphical user interface illustrating an overallscorecard summary generated by the algorithm of FIG. 2, in accordancewith embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 15 illustrates a computer apparatus used by the system of FIG. 1for providing a means for allowing a systems engineer to analyzetechnical solutions across multiple dimensions, in accordance withembodiments of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

FIG. 1 illustrates a system 2 for providing a means for allowing asystems engineer to analyze technical solutions across multipledimensions, in accordance with embodiments of the present invention. Theabove and other features of the present invention will become moredistinct by a detailed description of embodiments shown in combinationwith attached drawings. Identical reference numbers represent the sameor similar parts in the attached drawings of the invention.

As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the presentinvention can be embodied as a system, method or computer programproduct. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention can take the formof an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment(including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or anembodiment combining software and hardware aspects that can allgenerally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.”Furthermore, aspects of the present invention can take the form of acomputer program product embodied in one or more computer readablemedium(s) having computer readable program code embodied thereon.

Any combination of one or more computer readable medium(s) can beutilized. A computer readable storage medium can be, for example, butnot limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic,infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any suitablecombination of the foregoing. More specific examples (a non-exhaustivelist) of the computer readable storage medium can include the following:an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computerdiskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory(ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flashmemory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disc read-only memory(CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or anysuitable combination of the foregoing. In the context of this document,a computer readable storage medium can be any tangible medium that cancontain, or store a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of thepresent invention can be written in any combination of one or moreprogramming languages, including an object oriented programming languagesuch as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and conventional proceduralprogramming languages, such as the “C” programming language or any typeof programming languages such as, inter alia, an assembly language. Theprogram code can execute entirely on the user's device, partly on theuser's device, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user'sdevice.

Aspects of the present invention are described below with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer program instructions. These computer program instructions canbe provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, specialpurpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus toproduce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via theprocessor of the computer or other programmable data processingapparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified inthe flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.

These computer program instructions can also be stored in a computerreadable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable dataprocessing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particularmanner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readablemedium produce an article of manufacture including instructions whichimplement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

The computer program instructions can also be loaded onto a computer,other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to causea series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, otherprogrammable apparatus or other devices to produce a computerimplemented process such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer or other programmable apparatus provide processes forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams can represent a module, segment, or portionof code, which includes one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be notedthat, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in theblock can occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, twoblocks shown in succession can, in fact, be executed substantiallyconcurrently, or the blocks can sometimes be executed in the reverseorder, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be notedthat each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, andcombinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchartillustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-basedsystems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations ofspecial purpose hardware and computer instructions.

The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particularembodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention. Asused herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended toinclude the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicatesotherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “includes”and/or “including,” when used in this specification, specify thepresence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements,and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of oneor more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements,components, and/or groups thereof.

The corresponding structures, materials, acts, and equivalents of allmeans or step plus function elements in the claims below are intended toinclude any structure, material, or act for performing the function incombination with other claimed elements as specifically claimed. Thedescription of the present invention has been presented for purposes ofillustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive orlimited to the invention in the form disclosed. Many modifications andvariations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the artwithout departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. Theembodiment was chosen and described in order to best explain theprinciples of the invention and the practical application, and to enableothers of ordinary skill in the art to understand the invention forvarious embodiments with various modifications as are suited to theparticular use contemplated.

System 2 of FIG. 1 includes computers 5 a . . . 5 n connected through anetwork 7 to a computing system 14. Network 7 may include any type ofnetwork including, inter alia, a local area network, (LAN), a wide areanetwork (WAN), the Internet, a wireless network, etc. Computers 5 a . .. 5 n may include any type of computing system(s) including, inter alia,a computer (PC), a laptop computer, a tablet computer, a server, a PDA,a smart phone, etc. Computing system 14 may include any type ofcomputing system(s) including, inter alia, a computer (PC), a laptopcomputer, a tablet computer, a server, etc. Computing system 14 includesa memory system 8. Memory system 8 may include a single memory system.Alternatively, memory system 8 may include a plurality of memorysystems. Memory system 8 includes software 17 comprising multipleanalytical engines.

System 2 executing software 17 comprising multiple analytical engines(comprising analytics based algorithms) performs multiple analysisprocesses including, inter alia, a requirements quality analysis, anassumptions analysis, a dependency analysis, a stakeholder participationanalysis, and an entry criteria readiness analysis.

A requirements quality analysis quantifies a quality of a requirement(e.g., business/system/component) based on weighted quality attributes,requirements priority, and type. Each requirement comprises anindividual score correlated into an overall requirements quality score.The overall requirements quality score dynamically adjusts based on anumber of requirements and the individual requirement scores.Additionally, actions and recommendations are generated based on resultsof the requirements quality analysis.

An assumptions analysis quantifies content of assumptions (for therequirements) based on weighted common assessment attributes. Eachassumption is validated and assessed resulting in a quantifiedassumption validation score. Additionally, actions and recommendationsare generated based on results of the assumption analysis.

A dependency analysis quantifies a content dependencies based onweighted common assessment attributes. Each dependency is validated andassessed resulting in a quantified dependency validation score.Additionally, actions and recommendations are generated based on resultsof the dependency analysis.

A stakeholder participation analysis tracks and quantifies a review andapproval of required stakeholders for any given phase of projectdevelopment. Additionally, a stakeholder approval score is generated.

An entry criteria readiness analysis quantifies a status of identifiedentry and exit criteria for any given phase of the project through aseries of questions designed to prompt the system engineer for furtheranalysis. Based on answers to the questions, an entry criteria readinessscore is generated.

System 2 assigns priorities and weights to each dimension and utilizeseach of the aforementioned scores to return a quantified overall scoredepicting a quality of a technical solution under development therebyallowing the system engineer to perform quality analysis against thecriteria. The analytics-based algorithms determine measurable risk andimpact through scoring. Additionally, the aforementioned dimensions maybe utilized either individually, to perform a standalone analysis of aspecific dimension, or in combination for an overall assessment.Alternatively, the aforementioned dimensions provide a means forautomation and guidance to train a less experienced system engineer.System 2 allows for:

1. A defined, standardized criteria for requirements quality built intosoftware 17.

2. Criteria weighted for importance and impact to solution development.

3. Pre-defined, selectable answers to evaluate content against. Forexample, a user selects a response and software 17 automaticallycalculates a score based on the answers.

4. An ability to generate default issues and actions based on analysis.

5. Algorithms utilized to calculate scores based on assigned weights,priorities, and results of the analysis.

6. An automatic generation of prioritized action lists based on scoringresults to focus an author's revision efforts on problems that will havea greatest impact.

7. Detailed job aids and guidelines built into the software 17 withprompts, links, and automation to support the system engineers andpractitioners.

8. An ability to generate and export issue and actions lists.

FIG. 2 illustrates an algorithm detailing a process flow enabled bysystem 2 of FIG. 1 for providing a means for allowing a systems engineerto analyze technical solutions across multiple dimensions, in accordancewith embodiments of the present invention. Each of the steps in thealgorithm of FIG. 2 may be enabled and executed in any order by acomputer processor executing computer code. In step 202, requirements(NRQ) associated with an IT system for design, assumptions associatedwith the requirements (NRQ), dependency data associated with therequirements (NRQ), stakeholder data associated with the requirements(NRQ), and entry criteria readiness data associated with requirements(NRQ) are received by a computing system. In step 206, a quality levelof the requirements (NRQ) is evaluated by a computer processor executinga requirements analytical engine. In optional step 208, actions forimproving the requirements (NRQ) are generated based on results of theevaluation of step 206. In step 210, a requirements quality sub-score(RSC) for each requirement is calculated based on the quality level. Instep 212, the actions generated in step 208 are executed with respect tothe requirements (NRQ). Additionally, a modified requirements qualitysub-score associated with the original requirements quality sub-score isgenerated based on the execution results. In step 218, assumptions forhidden requirements (of the requirements (NRQ)) are evaluated by thecomputer processor executing an assumptions analytical engine. Inoptional step 220, actions for improving the assumptions are generatedbased on results of evaluating the assumptions. In step 224, anassumptions score for the assumptions is generated based on the hiddenrequirements. In step 226, the actions generated in step 220 areexecuted with respect to executing the actions with respect to theassumptions. Additionally, a modified assumptions score associated withthe original assumptions score is generated based on the executionresults. In step 232, the dependency data is evaluated by the computerprocessor executing a dependencies analytical engine. In optional step234, actions for improving the dependency data are generated based onresults of evaluating the dependency data. In step 238, a dependenciesscore for the dependencies data is generated based on results ofevaluating said dependency data. In step 240, the actions generated instep 234 are executed with respect to the dependency data. Additionally,a modified dependencies score associated with the original dependenciesscore is generated based on the execution results. In step 244, thestakeholder data is evaluated by the computer processor executing astakeholder analytical engine. In step 246, a stakeholder approval levelscore for the stakeholder data is generated based on results ofevaluating the stakeholder data. In step 248, actions associated withthe stakeholder approvals are executed. Additionally, a modifiedstakeholder approval level score associated with the originalstakeholder approval level score is generated based on the executionresults. In step 252, the entry criteria readiness data is evaluated bythe computer processor executing a criteria analytical engine. In step254, an entry criteria readiness score (ECRS) for the entry criteriareadiness data is generated based on results of evaluating the entrycriteria readiness data. In step 258, actions associated with thecriteria readiness data are executed. Additionally, a modified entrycriteria readiness score (ECRS) associated with the original entrycriteria readiness score (ECRS) is generated based on the executionresults. In step 260, an overall score summary summarizing each of the:requirements quality score, assumptions score, dependencies score,stakeholder score, and criteria readiness score is generated.

FIG. 3 illustrates an internal logic 300 view of steps 206, 208, and 210of FIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.Internal logic view 300 illustrates a project systems engineer 301inputting requirements (NRQ) into a quality evaluation module 302. Thequality evaluation module 302 comprises internal logic 302 a comprisedby an analytical engine evaluating a quality of the requirements basedon priority based weighted parameters 304. Additionally, internal logicview 300 illustrates a generate actions module 308 (for generatingassociated actions) and a generate requirements quality score module(for generating a requirements quality score).

FIG. 4 illustrates an internal logic view 400 of steps 218, 226, and 224of FIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.Internal logic view 400 illustrates a project systems engineer 401executing a validate assumptions module 402. The validate assumptionsmodule 402 comprises internal logic 402 a comprised by an analyticalengine evaluating assumptions for hidden requirements of therequirements based on priority based weighted parameters 404.Additionally, internal logic view 400 illustrates a generate actionsmodule 408 (for generating associated actions) and a generate assumptionscore module (for generating an assumptions score).

FIG. 5 illustrates an internal logic view 500 of steps 232, 234, and 238of FIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.Internal logic view 500 illustrates a project systems engineer 501executing a validate dependencies module 502. The validate dependenciesmodule 502 comprises internal logic 502 a comprised by an analyticalengine evaluating dependencies for critical details and requiredinformation of the requirements based on priority based weightedparameters 504. Additionally, internal logic view 500 illustrates agenerate actions module 508 (for generating associated actions) and agenerate dependencies score module (for generating a dependenciesscore).

FIG. 6 illustrates an internal logic view 600 of steps 244 and 246 ofFIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.Internal logic view 600 illustrates a project systems engineer 601executing a stakeholder participation tracker module 602. Thestakeholder participation tracker module 602 comprises internal logic602 a comprised by an analytical engine evaluating stakeholderparticipation associated with the requirements based on priority basedweighted parameters 604. Additionally, internal logic view 600illustrates a generate actions module 508 (for generating associatedactions) and a generate stakeholder score module (for generating astakeholder score).

FIG. 7 illustrates an internal logic view 700 of steps 252 and 254 ofFIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.Internal logic view 700 illustrates a project systems engineer 701executing a criteria readiness evaluation module 702. The criteriareadiness evaluation module 702 comprises internal logic 702 a comprisedby an analytical engine evaluating a readiness of criteria associatedwith the requirements based on priority based weighted parameters 704.Additionally, internal logic view 700 illustrates a generate checklistscore module 708 (for generating a checklist score).

FIG. 8 illustrates an additional internal logic view 800 of steps 252and 254 of FIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of the presentinvention. Internal logic view 800 illustrates a project systemsengineer 801 executing a defects module 802. The defects module 802comprises internal logic 802 a comprised by an analytical engineevaluating a risks and defects of criteria associated with therequirements based on priority based weighted parameters 804.Additionally, internal logic view 700 illustrates a review log module808 and a standard criteria score module (for generating a standardcriteria score).

FIG. 9 illustrates an algorithm detailing steps 204 and 210 of FIG. 2,in accordance with embodiments of the present invention. In step 900,requirements quality criteria weights and requirement priority weightsare calibrated. The requirements quality criteria weights (adding allweights will add up to 1 (100% scale)) are calibrated by evaluatingdefaults based on historical trends as illustrated in the followingtable 1:

TABLE 1 Requirements Evaluation Criteria Default Weights RE1-Understandable and Clear? RWE1- 0.1070 RE2-Traceable RWE2-0.0980RE3-Feasible RWE3-0.1150 RE4-All Stakeholders agree on requirementRWE4-0.1150 and its associated priority RE5-Validatable (Is it testableor RWE5-0.1150 With Acceptance Criteria?) RE6-Singular/Unique? (Atomic?)RWE6-0.0747 RE7-Business Non Functional captured/discussed RWE7-0.0980RE8-Business rules associated and considered RWE8-0.0747 RE9-DesignIndependent RWE9-0.0980 RE10-Consistent/Not Contradicting RWE10-0.0747RE11-Numbered? RWE11-0.0299

Calibrating requirements priority weights are illustrated in thefollowing table 2:

TABLE 2 Requirements Priority Default Weights RP1-Essential RWP1-0.7900(79x) RP2-Conditional RWP2-0.1600 (16x) RP3-Optional RWP3-0.0400 (4x)RP4-Non Prioritized RWP4-0.0100 (1x)

In step 902 (i.e., for each requirement in a requirement specification),a quality is assessed, a score is calculated, and a recommendation toimprove requirement quality is formulated as follows:

RQ_(i)=a requirement number, where i=1 to a total number of requirements(NRQ).

1. Identify and select a type of requirement as follows: Functional(FR), Non Functional (NFR), or other (OR)RTY_(i)=FR, NFR, or OR2. Identify and select a requirement priority as follows: Essential(RP1), Conditional (RP2), Optional (RP3), Not prioritized (RP4).RQP_(i)=RP1_(i), RP2, RP3, or RP43. Evaluate 11 attributes of a quality for a requirement I as follows:A. ERE1_(i)—Evaluate RE1 for requirement i by selecting yes or no.B. ERE2_(i)—Evaluate RE2 for requirement i by selecting yes or no.C. ERE3_(i)—Evaluate RE3 for requirement i by selecting yes or no.D. ERE4_(i)—Evaluate RE4 for requirement i by selecting yes or no.E. ERE5_(i)—Evaluate RE5 for requirement i by selecting yes or no.F. ERE6_(i)—Evaluate RE6 for requirement i by selecting yes or no.G. ERE7_(i)—Evaluate RE7 for requirement i by selecting yes, no, or notapplicable.H. ERE8_(i)—Evaluate RE8 for requirement i by selecting yes, no, or notapplicable.I. ERE9_(i)—Evaluate RE9 for requirement i by selecting yes or no.J. ERE10_(i)—Evaluate RE10 for requirement i by selecting yes or no.K. ERE11_(i)—Evaluate RE11 by for requirement i selecting yes or no.4. Calculate a requirement quality score RSC_(i) for each requirement ibased on results of the evaluation of the 11 attributes and theaforementioned criteria weightsRSC_(i)=Σ_(n=1) ¹¹(RWE_(n)*ERE_(n))

ERE_(n) comprises a quality attribute for each said requirement andRWE_(n) comprises a default weighting factor for each quality attribute.

5. Generate standard action (RSA) messages for improving eachrequirement i (i.e., by communicating and working with a requirementsauthor). Each requirement i (i.e., comprising an answer of No) isidentified from RE1 to RE11. For example, RSA messages may include,inter alia:A. RSA1_(i)—Requires clarification.B. RSA2_(i)—Requires tracing to a higher or lower level requirement.C. RSA3_(i)—Not feasible and requires re-evaluation.D. RSA4_(i)—Obtain stakeholder agreement or remove requirement.E. RSA5_(i)—Must include measurable and testable statements.F. RSA6_(i)—Must be simplified and broken down into additionalrequirements.G. RSA7_(i)—Associated non-functional requirements must be discussed andcaptured if applicable.H. RSA8_(i)—Associated business rules must be discussed and captured ifapplicable.I. RSA9_(i)—Must be rewritten at a higher business level. Documentdesign details in lower level requirements document/specification.J. RSA10_(i)—Remove or rewrite contradicting requirement.K. RSA11_(i)—Enumerate requirement.6. All actions from RSA1_(i) to RSA12_(i) are consolidated into onerecommendation for a requirement i.

In step 904, a total number of requirements (NRQ) within a requirementsspecification is counted. For example:

A. NRP1—A number of requirements selected as essential (RP1).

B. NRP2—A number of requirements selected as conditional (RP2).

C. NRP3—A number of requirements selected as optional (RP3).

D. NRP4—A number of requirements selected as non-prioritized (RP4).

Resulting in the following equation: NRQ=NRP1+NRP2+NRP3+NRP4

In step 908, a requirement specification distribution (RSD), anormalized requirement specification distribution (NRSD), and normalizeddistribution for each requirement type (DERP1, DERP2, DERP3, DERP4) arecalculated as follows:

1. Compute a requirement specification distribution (RSD).

2. Compute a distribution of essential requirements (RSD1) by computinga number of essential requirements in the requirements specificationtimes a weight for essential requirements as follows:RSD1=NRP1*RWP13. Compute a distribution of conditional requirements (RSD2) bycomputing a number of conditional requirements in the requirementsspecification times a weight for conditional requirements as follows:RSD2=NRP2*RWP23. Compute a distribution of optional requirements (RSD3) by computing anumber of optional requirements in the requirements specification timesa weight for optional requirements as follows:RSD3=NRP3*RWP34. Compute a distribution of non-prioritized requirements (RSD4) bycomputing a number of non-prioritized requirements in the requirementsspecification times a weight for non-prioritized requirements asfollows:RSD4=NRP4*RWP4

Resulting in the following equation: RSD=RSD1+RSD2+RSD3+RSD4

5. Normalize a requirement specification distribution (NRSD) to scalefrom 0 to 1 (i.e., 0% to 100%), where NRSD—Normalized requirementspecification distribution (RSD)

Resulting in the following equation: NRSD=NRSD1+NRSD2+NRSD3+NRSD4=1(100%)

6. Normalize a distribution of essential requirements (NRSD1) bydividing a distribution of essential requirements (RSD1) by therequirement specification distribution (RSD) as follows:NRSD1=RSD1/RSD7. Compute a distribution for each essential requirement (DERP1) bydividing a normalized distribution of essential requirements (NRSD1) bya number of essential requirements (NRP1) as follows:DERP1=NRSD1/NRP18. Normalize a distribution of conditional requirements (NRSD2) bydividing a distribution of conditional requirements (RSD2) by therequirement specification distribution (RSD) as follows:NRSD2=RSD2/RSD9. Compute a distribution for each conditional requirement (DERP2) bydividing a normalized distribution of conditional requirements (NRSD2)by a number of conditional requirements (NRP2) as follows:DERP2=NRSD2/NRP210. Normalize a distribution of optional requirements (NRSD3) bydividing a distribution of optional requirements (RSD3) by therequirement specification distribution (RSD) as follows:NRSD3=RSD3/RSD11. Compute a distribution for each optional requirement (DERP3) bydividing a normalized distribution of optional requirements (NRSD3) by anumber of optional requirements (NRP3) as follows:DERP3=NRSD3/NRP312. Normalize a distribution of non-prioritized requirements (NRSD4) bydividing a distribution of non-prioritized requirements (RSD4) by therequirement specification distribution (RSD) as follows:NRSD4=RSD4/RSD13. Compute a distribution for each non-prioritized requirement (DERP4)by dividing a normalized distribution of non-prioritized requirements(NRSD4) by a number of non-prioritized requirements (NRP4) as follows:DERP4=NRSD4/NRP4

In step 910, a requirements specification quality score (i.e., arequirements quality score) is calculated as follows:

1. For each requirement in a requirement specification, calculate asub-score (RSCPT_(i)) as a percentage of a requirements specificationquality score, where i=1 to total number of requirements (NRQ).

2. Based on a requirement type RTY_(i) (e.g., essential, conditional,optional, non-prioritized, etc), use the normalized distribution foreach requirement (DERP1 or DERP2 or DERP3 or DERP4) to compute thesub-score (RSCPT_(i)) by multiplying the requirement quality scoreRSC_(i) times the normalized distribution for each requirement (DERP1 orDERP2 or DERP3 or DERP4) as follows:RSCPT_(i)=(RSC_(i)*DERP1) or (RSC_(i)*DERP2) or (RSC_(i)*DERP3) or(RSC_(i)*DERP4)3. Add all sub-scores for each requirement to calculate the requirementsspecification quality score (RSQS) as follows:

${RSQS} = {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{NRQ}\left( {RSCPT}_{i} \right)}$

FIG. 10 illustrates an algorithm detailing steps 218, 220, and 224 ofFIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of the present invention. Each ofthe steps in the algorithm of FIG. 10 is repeated for every assumptionstarting with a first assumption AIDi=1 until i=NAS (i.e., a totalnumber of assumptions) thereby initializing a number of assumptionsrequiring actions (NASA to 0). In step 1000, an assumption unique AIDiand an assumption description (AIDi) are documented. In step 1002, anassessment type (AST) is selected. For example, an assessment type mayinclude, inter alia, a functional or non-functional requirement, adependency or constraint, a business rule or risk, an issue or designdecision, etc. In step 1004, it is determined if an AST is known. If instep 1004, it is determined that an AST is not known then in step 1008,assessment guidance is used to answer questions for determining the ASTand step 1002 is repeated. If in step 1004, it is determined that an ASTis known then in step 1010, the AST is validated and captured. In step1012, it is determined if the AST has been validated. If in step 1012,it is determined that the AST has not been validated then in step 1014,an action for improving an assumption (AIAi) is generated and anassumption status is documented as “Action Required”. In step 1018, acounter for NASA is increased by one. If in step 1012, it is determinedthat the AST has been validated then in step 1016, an assumption statusis documented as “No Action Required”. In step 1020, it is determined ifa last assumption has been assessed and in step 1022, an assumptionvalidation score is calculated as follows:(1−(NASA/NAS)).

FIG. 11, including FIGS. 11A and 11B, illustrates an algorithm detailingsteps 232, 234, and 238 of FIG. 2, in accordance with embodiments of thepresent invention. Each of the steps in the algorithm of FIG. 11 isrepeated for every dependency starting with a first dependency DIDi=1until i=TDE (i.e., a total number of dependencies) thereby initializinga number of dependencies requiring action (i.e., TDRA to 0). In step1100, a dependency unique DUNi and a dependency description (DEDi) aredocumented. In step 1102, a dependency clarity (DECi) is assessed. Instep 1104, it is determined if a clarity is defined. If in step 1104, itis determined that a dependency clarity (DECi) is not defined, then instep 1108, required actions for dependency owners are generated.Additionally, a dependency clarity (DECi) is tracked as “ActionRequired. If in step 1104, it is determined that a dependency clarity(DECi) is defined then in steps 1110 and 1112, it is determined if adependency impact or risk has been defined (DEIRi). If in steps 1110 and1112, it is determined that a dependency impact or risk has not beendefined (DEIRi) then in step 1114, required actions for dependencyowners are generated. Additionally, a dependency impact or risk (DEIRi)is tracked as “Action Required. If in steps 1110 and 1112, it isdetermined that a dependency impact or risk has been defined (DEIRi)then in steps 1116 and 1118, it is determined if a dependency owner hasbeen identified (DEOi). If in steps 1116 and 1118, it is determined thata dependency a dependency owner has not been identified then in step1120, required actions for dependency owners are generated.Additionally, a dependency owner (DEOi) is tracked as “Action Required”.If in steps 1116 and 1118, it is determined that a dependency owner hasbeen identified then in steps 1122 and 1124, it is determined ifdependency milestones have been documented (DEMi). If in steps 1122 and1124, it is determined that dependency milestones have not beendocumented then in step 1126, required actions for dependency owners aregenerated. Additionally, a dependency milestone (DEMi) is tracked as“Action Required”. In step 1128, it is determined if a last dependencyhas been evaluated. If in step 1128, it is determined that a lastdependency has been evaluated then in step 1130, a dependency validationscore is calculated as follows: (1−(TDRA/TDE)). If in step 1128, it isdetermined that a last dependency has not been evaluated then in step1132, TDRA is increased by one and step 1100 is repeated.

FIG. 12 illustrates an algorithm detailing steps 244 and 246 of FIG. 2,in accordance with embodiments of the present invention. Each of thesteps in the algorithm of FIG. 12 is repeated for every stakeholderstarting with a first stakeholder SHi=1 until i=TSHH (i.e., a totalnumber of stakeholders).

The following values are initialized:

1. A number of stakeholders that did not approve formal requirements(SNAFR) to 0.

2. A number of stakeholders that conditionally approved formalrequirements (SCAFR) to 0

3. A number of stakeholders that approved formal requirements (SAFR) to0.

Additionally, a weight for conditionally (WCAR) approving requirementsis calibrated with respect to a default of 0.5 (50%). In step 1200,stakeholder information (STLi) is documented. Stakeholder informationmay include, inter alia, a name, email address, role, application,customer, etc. In step 1202, stakeholder attendance (i toinformal/preliminary requirements review (SAIRi) and document plan andactual dates) is assessed. In step 1204, stakeholder attendance (i toformal requirements review (SFRAi) and formal requirements review) isassessed. In step 1208, it is determined if formal requirements havebeen approved. If in step 1208, it is determined that formalrequirements have not been approved then in step 1206, it is determinedif an informal review (SALRi) or formal review (SFRAi) has been executedand in step 1212 SNAFR is increased by one. If in step 1208, it isdetermined that formal requirements have been approved then in step1210, it is determined if formal requirements have been conditionallyapproved and step 1214 SCAFR is increased by one or in step 1218, SAFRis increased by one. In step 1220, if a last stakeholder has beenanalyzed then in step 1224, a stakeholder approval level is calculatedas follows: ((SAFR+(WCAR*SCAFR))/TSH. In step 1220, if a laststakeholder has not been analyzed then step 1200 is repeated.

FIG. 13 illustrates an algorithm detailing steps 252 and 254 of FIG. 2,in accordance with embodiments of the present invention. Each of thesteps in the algorithm of FIG. 13 is repeated for every standardcriteria and checklist item (i.e., entry criteria) starting with a firstentry criteria ECi=1 until i=ECT (i.e., entry criteria). In step 1300,an assessment ECAi (all entry criteria assessments) for ECi generates ananswer of “Yes”, “No”, “Not Applicable”, or “Not Evaluated”. In step1302, a criteria weight (WSCi) is assigned to entry criteria points ECPisuch that ECPi=WSCi. In step 1304, all total possible criteria points(TPCP) are calculated as follows: TPCP=Σ_(i=1) ^(ECT) WSCi; where WSCicomprises each standard criteria item. In step 1308, an entry criteriareadiness score (ECRS) is generated as follows: PQA=Σ_(i=1) ^(ECT) ECPiand ECRS=PQA/TPCP.

FIG. 14 illustrates a graphical user interface 1400 detailing an overallscorecard summary 1401 generated by the algorithm of FIG. 2, inaccordance with embodiments of the present invention. Overall scorecardsummary 1401 displays each of scoring elements 1402 a . . . 1402 fgraphically and numerically via chart 1402 and chart 1407. Additionally,overall scorecard summary 1401 displays (graphically and numerically) anaggregated overall health score 1404.

FIG. 15 illustrates a computer apparatus 90 (e.g., computing system 14of FIG. 1) used by system 2 of FIG. 1 for providing a means for allowinga systems engineer to analyze technical solutions across multipledimensions, in accordance with embodiments of the present invention. Thecomputer system 90 includes a processor 91, an input device 92 coupledto the processor 91, an output device 93 coupled to the processor 91,and memory devices 94 and 95 each coupled to the processor 91. The inputdevice 92 may be, inter alia, a keyboard, a mouse, a camera, atouchscreen, etc. The output device 93 may be, inter alia, a printer, aplotter, a computer screen, a magnetic tape, a removable hard disk, afloppy disk, etc. The memory devices 94 and 95 may be, inter alia, ahard disk, a floppy disk, a magnetic tape, an optical storage such as acompact disc (CD) or a digital video disc (DVD), a dynamic random accessmemory (DRAM), a read-only memory (ROM), etc. The memory device 95includes a computer code 97. The computer code 97 includes algorithms(e.g., the algorithms of FIGS. 2-13) for providing a means for allowinga systems engineer to analyze technical solutions across multipledimensions. The processor 91 executes the computer code 97. The memorydevice 94 includes input data 96. The input data 96 includes inputrequired by the computer code 97. The output device 93 displays outputfrom the computer code 97. Either or both memory devices 94 and 95 (orone or more additional memory devices not shown in FIG. 15) may includethe algorithms of FIGS. 2-13 and may be used as a computer usable medium(or a computer readable medium or a program storage device) having acomputer readable program code embodied therein and/or having other datastored therein, wherein the computer readable program code includes thecomputer code 97. Generally, a computer program product (or,alternatively, an article of manufacture) of the computer system 90 mayinclude the computer usable medium (or the program storage device).

Still yet, any of the components of the present invention could becreated, integrated, hosted, maintained, deployed, managed, serviced,etc. by a service supplier who offers to provide a means for allowing asystems engineer to analyze technical solutions across multipledimensions. Thus the present invention discloses a process fordeploying, creating, integrating, hosting, maintaining, and/orintegrating computing infrastructure, including integratingcomputer-readable code into the computer system 90, wherein the code incombination with the computer system 90 is capable of performing amethod for determining a region within a field of view of an objectfacing camera. In another embodiment, the invention provides a businessmethod that performs the process steps of the invention on asubscription, advertising, and/or fee basis. That is, a servicesupplier, such as a Solution Integrator, could offer to provide a meansfor allowing a systems engineer to analyze technical solutions acrossmultiple dimensions. In this case, the service supplier can create,maintain, support, etc. a computer infrastructure that performs theprocess steps of the invention for one or more customers. In return, theservice supplier can receive payment from the customer(s) under asubscription and/or fee agreement and/or the service supplier canreceive payment from the sale of advertising content to one or morethird parties.

While FIG. 15 shows the computer system 90 as a particular configurationof hardware and software, any configuration of hardware and software, aswould be known to a person of ordinary skill in the art, may be utilizedfor the purposes stated supra in conjunction with the particularcomputer system 90 of FIG. 15. For example, the memory devices 94 and 95may be portions of a single memory device rather than separate memorydevices.

While embodiments of the present invention have been described hereinfor purposes of illustration, many modifications and changes will becomeapparent to those skilled in the art. Accordingly, the appended claimsare intended to encompass all such modifications and changes as fallwithin the true spirit and scope of this invention.

What is claimed is:
 1. An IT system technical solution analysis anddevelopment improvement method comprising: receiving, by a computerprocessor of a computing system, requirements (NRQ) associated withhardware components for an IT system for design, assumptions associatedwith said requirements (NRQ), dependency data associated with saidrequirements (NRQ), stakeholder data associated with said requirements(NRQ), and entry criteria readiness data associated with saidrequirements (NRQ); building, by said processor, said requirements (NRQ)into internal logic of a requirements analytical engine software moduleof a quality evaluation hardware circuit; evaluating, by said computerprocessor executing said requirements analytical engine software module,a quality level of said requirements (NRQ); calculating, by saidcomputer processor executing a requirements quality score hardwarecircuit based on said quality level, a requirements quality sub-score(RSC) for each requirement of said requirements (NRQ); evaluating, bysaid computer processor executing an assumptions analytical engine of avalidate assumptions hardware circuit, said assumptions for hiddenrequirements of said requirements (NRQ); generating, by said computerprocessor executing a validate assumptions hardware circuit based onsaid hidden requirements, an assumptions score for said assumptions;evaluating, by said computer processor executing a dependenciesanalytical engine of a validate dependencies hardware circuit, saiddependency data; generating, by said computer processor executingdependencies score hardware circuit based on results of said evaluatingsaid dependency data, a dependencies score for said dependencies data;evaluating, by said computer processor executing a stakeholderanalytical engine, said stakeholder data; generating, by said computerprocessor based on results of said evaluating said stakeholder data, astakeholder approval level score for said stakeholder data; evaluating,by said computer processor executing a criteria analytical engine, saidentry criteria readiness data; generating, by said computer processorbased on results of said evaluating said entry criteria readiness data,an entry criteria readiness score (ECRS) for entry criteria readinessdata; building, by said processor, defects internal logic into saidrequirements analytical engine software module; evaluating, by saidcomputer processor executing said defects internal logic, defects ofsaid hardware components for said IT system for design; generating, bysaid computer processor, an overall score summary summarizing each saidrequirements quality score, said assumptions score, said dependenciesscore, said stakeholder score, and said criteria readiness score,wherein said generating said overall score summary comprises: assigningpriorities and weights to said requirements quality score, saidassumptions score, said dependencies score, said stakeholder score, andsaid criteria readiness score, wherein said overall score summarydepicts a quality of a technical solution for said IT system underdevelopment thereby automatically enabling a system engineer, associatedwith said IT system for design, to execute a quality analysis againstsaid overall score summary, and wherein said quality analysis results inhardware enabled prompts, links, and automation processes to support andenable said system engineer to develop said IT system for design therebyimproving a requirement quality of said IT system; integrating, by saidcomputer processor, a technical solution for improving said requirements(NRQ) associated with said hardware components for said IT system fordesign; creating and deploying an improved IT system based on saidtechnical solution for improving said requirements (NRQ) associated withsaid hardware components for said IT system for design; and presenting,by said computer processor via a plotter hardware device over a network,graphical and numerical charts indicating said overall score summary. 2.The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating, by said computerprocessor based on results of said evaluating said quality level of saidrequirements (NRQ), actions for improving said requirements (NRQ);executing said actions with respect to requirements (NRQ); andgenerating, by said computer processor based on said executing saidactions, a modified requirements quality sub-score associated with saidrequirements quality sub-score (RSC).
 3. The method of claim 1, furthercomprising: generating, by said computer processor based on results ofsaid evaluating said assumptions, actions for improving saidassumptions; executing said actions with respect to assumptions; andgenerating, by said computer processor based on said executing saidactions, a modified assumptions score associated with said assumptionsscore.
 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating, by saidcomputer processor based on results of said evaluating said dependencydata, actions for improving said dependency data; executing said actionswith respect to dependency data; and generating, by said computerprocessor based on said executing said actions, a dependencies scoreassociated with said dependency data.
 5. The method of claim 1, whereineach said requirements quality sub-score (RSC_(i))=Σ_(n=1) ¹¹(RWE_(n)*ERE_(n)), wherein ERE_(n) comprises a quality attribute foreach said requirement, and wherein RWE_(n) comprises a default weightingfactor for each said quality attribute.
 6. The method of claim 5,wherein said evaluating said quality level of said requirements (NRQ)comprises: calibrating quality criteria weighting factors and priorityweighting factors for said requirements (NRQ); tabulating a total numberof specified requirements (i=1) of said requirements (NRQ) within aspecified requirements specification; computing a requirementspecification distribution value, a normalized requirement specificationvalue, and a normalized distribution value for each type of saidrequirements (NRQ); and computing a requirements quality score (RSQS).7. The method of claim 6, wherein said computing said requirementsquality score (RSQS) comprises: calculating a sub-score (RSCPT_(i)),wherein (RSCPT_(i))=(RSC_(i))*DERP, wherein DERP comprises a nonprioritized requirement of said requirements (NRQ), and wherein(RSQS)=Σ_(i=1) ^(NRQ)(RSCPT_(i)).
 8. The method of claim 1, wherein saidevaluating said assumptions comprises: documenting assumptiondescriptions (ALDi) for said assumptions; selecting assessment types(AST) for said assumptions; validating said assessment types (AST); anddocumenting assumption statuses (ASi) for said assumptions.
 9. Themethod of claim 8, wherein said assumptions score=1−(NASA/NAS)), whereinNAS comprises a total number of said assumptions, and wherein NASAcomprises a number of assumptions requiring actions.
 10. The method ofclaim 1, wherein said evaluating said dependency data comprises:documenting dependency descriptions (DEDi) and dependency numbers (DUNi)for dependencies of said dependency data; assessing dependency clarityfor said dependencies; assessing a dependency clarity impact/risk forsaid dependencies; assessing a dependency identification for an owner ofsaid dependencies; and assessing a documented dependency milestones forsaid dependencies.
 11. The method of claim 10, wherein said dependenciesscore=1−(TDRA/TDE)), wherein TDE comprises a total number of saiddependencies, and wherein TDRA comprises a number of said dependenciesrequiring actions.
 12. The method of claim 1, wherein said evaluatingsaid stakeholder data comprises: determining a number of stakeholders(SNAFR) that did not approve said requirements (NRQ); determining anumber of stakeholders (SCAFR) that conditionally approved saidrequirements (NRQ); determining a number of stakeholders (SAFR) thatapproved said requirements (NRQ); and determining a weight (WCAR) forconditionally approving said requirements (NRQ).
 13. The method of claim12, wherein said stakeholder approval levelscore=((SAFR+(WCAR*SCAFR))/TSH, and wherein TSH comprises a total numberof stakeholders.
 14. The method of claim 1, wherein said evaluating saidcriteria readiness data comprises: determining weights (WSCi) associatedto standard criteria items of said criteria readiness data; updatingdefault weights for said standard criteria items; initializing criteriaassessments (ECAi) of said standard criteria items from i=1 to i=totalnumber of standard criteria items and checklist items for evaluation(ECT); initializing entry criteria points (ECPi) to 0; adding all ofsaid weights (WSCi); and initializing all possible criteria points(TPCP), wherein TPCP=Σ_(i=1) ^(ECT) WSCi.
 15. The method of claim 14,wherein said entry criteria readiness score (ECRS)=PQA/TPCP.
 16. Themethod of claim 1, further comprising: providing at least one supportservice for at least one of creating, integrating, hosting, maintaining,and deploying computer-readable code in the computing system, said codebeing executed by the computer processor to implement said receiving,said evaluating said quality level, said calculating said requirementsquality sub-score), said evaluating said assumptions, said generatingsaid assumptions score, said evaluating said dependency data, saidgenerating said dependencies score, said evaluating said stakeholderdata, said generating said stakeholder approval level score, saidevaluating said entry criteria readiness data, said generating saidentry criteria readiness score (ECRS), and said generating said overallscore summary.
 17. A computing system comprising a computer processorcoupled to a computer-readable memory unit, said memory unit comprisinginstructions that when executed by the computer processor implements anIT system technical solution analysis and development improvement methodcomprising: receiving, by said computer processor, receiving, by acomputer processor of a computing system, requirements (NRQ) associatedwith hardware components for an IT system for design, assumptionsassociated with said requirements (NRQ), dependency data associated withsaid requirements (NRQ), stakeholder data associated with saidrequirements (NRQ), and entry criteria readiness data associated withsaid requirements (NRQ); building, by said processor, said requirements(NRQ) into internal logic of a requirements analytical engine softwaremodule of a quality evaluation hardware circuit; evaluating, by saidcomputer processor executing said requirements analytical enginesoftware module, a quality level of said requirements (NRQ);calculating, by said computer processor executing a requirements qualityscore hardware circuit based on said quality level, a requirementsquality sub-score (RSC) for each requirement of said requirements (NRQ);evaluating, by said computer processor executing an assumptionsanalytical engine of a validate assumptions hardware circuit, saidassumptions for hidden requirements of said requirements (NRQ);generating, by said computer processor executing a validate assumptionshardware circuit based on said hidden requirements, an assumptions scorefor said assumptions; evaluating, by said computer processor executing adependencies analytical engine of a validate dependencies hardwarecircuit, said dependency data; generating, by said computer processorexecuting dependencies score hardware circuit based on results of saidevaluating said dependency data, a dependencies score for saiddependencies data; evaluating, by said computer processor executing astakeholder analytical engine, said stakeholder data; generating, bysaid computer processor based on results of said evaluating saidstakeholder data, a stakeholder approval level score for saidstakeholder data; evaluating, by said computer processor executing acriteria analytical engine, said entry criteria readiness data;generating, by said computer processor based on results of saidevaluating said entry criteria readiness data, an entry criteriareadiness score (ECRS) for entry criteria readiness data; building, bysaid processor, defects internal logic into said requirements analyticalengine software module; evaluating, by said computer processor executingsaid defects internal logic, defects of said hardware components forsaid IT system for design; generating, by said computer processor, anoverall score summary summarizing each said requirements quality score,said assumptions score, said dependencies score, said stakeholder score,and said criteria readiness score, wherein said generating said overallscore summary comprises: assigning priorities and weights to saidrequirements quality score, said assumptions score, said dependenciesscore, said stakeholder score, and said criteria readiness score,wherein said overall score summary depicts a quality of a technicalsolution for said IT system under development thereby automaticallyenabling a system engineer, associated with said IT system for design,to execute a quality analysis against said overall score summary, andwherein said quality analysis results in hardware enabled prompts,links, and automation processes to support and enable said systemengineer to develop said IT system for design thereby improving arequirement quality of said IT system; integrating, by said computerprocessor, a technical solution for improving said requirements (NRQ)associated with said hardware components for said IT system for design;creating and deploying an improved IT system based on said technicalsolution for improving said requirements (NRQ) associated with saidhardware components for said IT system for design; and presenting, bysaid computer processor via a plotter hardware device over a network,graphical and numerical charts indicating said overall score summary.18. The computing system of claim 17, wherein said method furthercomprises: generating, by said computer processor based on results ofsaid evaluating said quality level of said requirements (NRQ), actionsfor improving said requirements (NRQ); executing said actions withrespect to requirements (NRQ); and generating, by said computerprocessor based on said executing said actions, a modified requirementsquality score associated with said requirements quality score.
 19. Thecomputing system of claim 17, wherein said method further comprises:generating, by said computer processor based on results of saidevaluating said assumptions, actions for improving said assumptions;executing said actions with respect to assumptions; and generating, bysaid computer processor based on said executing said actions, a modifiedassumptions score associated with said assumptions score.
 20. A computerprogram product for an IT system technical solution analysis anddevelopment improvement, the computer program product comprising: one ormore computer-readable, tangible storage devices; program instructions,stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices, to initiatereceiving requirements (NRQ) associated with hardware components for anIT system for design, assumptions associated with said requirements(NRQ), dependency data associated with said requirements (NRQ),stakeholder data associated with said requirements (NRQ), and entrycriteria readiness data associated with said requirements (NRQ);implements an IT system technical solution analysis and developmentimprovement method comprising: program instructions, stored on at leastone of the one or more storage devices to build, said requirements (NRQ)into internal logic of a requirements analytical engine software moduleof a quality evaluation hardware circuit; program instructions, storedon at least one of the one or more storage devices and executed by saidrequirements analytical engine software module, to evaluate a qualitylevel of said requirements (NRQ); program instructions, stored on atleast one of the one or more storage devices and executed by a qualityevaluation hardware circuit of said computing system, to calculate basedon said quality level, a requirements quality sub-score (RSC) for eachrequirement of said requirements (NRQ); program instructions, stored onat least one of the one or more storage devices and executed by avalidate assumptions hardware circuit, to evaluate said assumptions forhidden requirements of said requirements (NRQ); program instructions,stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices and executedby a validate assumptions hardware circuit, to generate based on saidhidden requirements, an assumptions score for said assumptions; programinstructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devicesand executed by a validate dependencies hardware circuit, to evaluatesaid dependency data; program instructions, stored on at least one ofthe one or more storage devices and executed by a dependencies scorehardware circuit, to generate based on results of said evaluating saiddependency data, a dependencies score for said dependencies data;program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storagedevices, to evaluate said stakeholder data; program instructions, storedon at least one of the one or more storage devices, to generate based onresults of said evaluating said stakeholder data, a stakeholder approvallevel score for said stakeholder data; program instructions, stored onat least one of the one or more storage devices, to evaluate said entrycriteria readiness data; program instructions, stored on at least one ofthe one or more storage devices, to generate based on results of saidevaluating said entry criteria readiness data, an entry criteriareadiness score (ECRS) for entry criteria readiness data; programinstructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices,to build defects internal logic into said requirements analytical enginesoftware module; program instructions, stored on at least one of the oneor more storage devices and executed by said defects internal logic, toevaluate defects of said hardware components for said IT system fordesign; program instructions, stored on at least one of the one or morestorage devices, to generate an overall score summary summarizing eachsaid requirements quality score, said assumptions score, saiddependencies score, said stakeholder score, and said criteria readinessscore, wherein said program instructions to generate said overall scoresummary comprise: program instructions to assign priorities and weightsto said requirements quality score, said assumptions score, saiddependencies score, said stakeholder score, and said criteria readinessscore, wherein said overall score summary depicts a quality of atechnical solution for said IT system under development therebyautomatically enabling a system engineer, associated with said IT systemfor design, to execute a quality analysis against said overall scoresummary, and wherein said quality analysis results in hardware enabledprompts, links, and automation processes to support and enable saidsystem engineer to develop said IT system for design thereby improving arequirement quality of said IT system; program instructions, stored onat least one of the one or more storage devices, to integrate atechnical solution for improving said requirements (NRQ) associated withsaid hardware components for said IT system for design; programinstructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices,to create and deploy an improved IT system based on said technicalsolution for improving said requirements (NRQ) associated with saidhardware components for said IT system for design; and programinstructions, stored on at least one of the one or more storage devices,to present, via a plotter hardware device over a network, graphical andnumerical charts indicating said overall score summary.